Towards Global Cooperation: The Case for a Deliberative Global Citizens' Assembly

Vlerick, Michael

doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12785

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Deliberative (national or global) citizens’ assemblies (DCAs) of randomly selected representative participants, such as those described above, have generally been more effective in reaching agreement on solutions that are mutually acceptable, long-term, and reflective of the global good compared to conferences of parties (COPs) appointed by governments to address complex global issues such as climate change (Dryzek et al 2011 ; Vlerick 2020 ). Governments that participate in COPs often advocate positions that reflect their short-term economic benefits or domestic political realities (Aklin and Mildenberger 2020 ).…”

Section: Leverage Points For Operationalizing Earth Stewardshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Earth stewardship: Shaping a sustainable future through interacting policy and norm shifts

Chapin

Weber

Bennett

et al. 2022

Ambio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transformation toward a sustainable future requires an earth stewardship approach to shift society from its current goal of increasing material wealth to a vision of sustaining built, natural, human, and social capital—equitably distributed across society, within and among nations. Widespread concern about earth’s current trajectory and support for actions that would foster more sustainable pathways suggests potential social tipping points in public demand for an earth stewardship vision. Here, we draw on empirical studies and theory to show that movement toward a stewardship vision can be facilitated by changes in either policy incentives or social norms. Our novel contribution is to point out that both norms and incentives must change and can do so interactively. This can be facilitated through leverage points and complementarities across policy areas, based on values, system design, and agency. Potential catalysts include novel democratic institutions and engagement of non-governmental actors, such as businesses, civic leaders, and social movements as agents for redistribution of power. Because no single intervention will transform the world, a key challenge is to align actions to be synergistic, persistent, and scalable.

show abstract

Section: Leverage Points For Operationalizing Earth Stewardshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The necessity of pursuing multiple approaches to stewardship transformations demands close attention to harmonizing stewardship efforts (Vlerick 2020 ). For example, efforts to reduce environmental degradation should also lessen, or at least not exacerbate, social inequities.…”

Section: Leverage Points For Operationalizing Earth Stewardshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Earth stewardship: Shaping a sustainable future through interacting policy and norm shifts

Chapin

Weber

Bennett

et al. 2022

Ambio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Not only are the appointed citizens free from pressure by interest groups, they are also free to consider the long term (in contrast to elected politicians who might be reticent to impose measures which are costly in the short term for fear of losing the next elections). Moreover, social experiments with such citizen councils show that they often come up with thoughtful and sensible proposals [12][13][14][15].…”

Section: Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Global coordination on policy, however, is by no means an easy feat. Think of the difficulty to reach a global agreement on climate policy [14,15]. Supra-national and global institutionssuch as the United Nations (UN), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Trade Organization (WTO)have a crucial role to play in facilitating such an agreement.…”

Section: Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

15 Calibrating the balance: The ethics of regulating the production and use of nanotechnology applications

Vlerick¹

2021

Handbook of Nanoethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanotechnology (henceforth NT) is a rapidly advancing field with the potential of revolutionizing diverse areas such as electronics, health care, transport, and energy production. NT products and applications come with (potential) benefits and (potential) harms. The presence of potential harms calls for regulation. Both underregulation and overregulation -I argueare morally undesirable. In the case of underregulation, stakeholders fall victim to the harmful effects of the technology. In the case of overregulation, stakeholders are deprived of the benefits of the technology. In this chapter, I identify the biases and factors that lead to underregulation and overregulation and offer solutions in response. More precisely, I argue that a lack of specific regulation, the presence of conflicts of interest and short-term economic incentives could lead to the underregulation of NT products and applications. Conversely, I argue that a negativity bias, harm aversion, the fear of opening "Pandora's box," and the intuition that what is natural is good and what is artificial (human-made) is bad could lead to overregulation. To avoid these pitfalls and the woes of underregulation and overregulation following in their wake, we need to set up a processwhich I describein which policymakers and independent scientists closely collaborate.

show abstract

“…Often the creation of a deliberative process builds solidarity and policy innovation by stealth. The greatest obstacle to deliberative democracy remains highly uneven power asymmetries (Dryzek et al, 2019a; Vlerick, 2020). Yet, deliberation is common across different political systems, even in authoritarian and hierarchical political settings (Curato et al, 2017).…”

Section: Migration and Urban Precaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy Opportunities and Constraints for Addressing Urban Precarity of Migrant Populations

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Addressing sources and drivers of precarity among marginalized migrant populations in urban spaces is central to making cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable for all. Yet dominant policy discourses continue to frame migrants as problematic causes of insecurity and tend to exclude them from policy processes. Deliberative democratic theory suggests that inclusive processes have the potential to create innovative solutions for resilient cities. This study elicits and reports on self‐identified sources of precarity and insecurity as experienced by new low‐income migrant populations. It combines visual ethnography and deliberative democracy tools in an action research process that facilitated dialogue between migrant populations, urban planners and policy stakeholders. The objective is to elicit policy opportunities and constraints for changing dominant discourses, with a view to enhance marginalized lives and to implement sustainable urban infrastructure in Chattogram, the second largest city of Bangladesh. The results show options for addressing precarity, developed through facilitating migrants and planners to engage with each other’s perspectives. Priorities include focusing on insecure tenure, exposure to environmental hazards, and representation in planning processes. Integrating the perspectives and lived experiences of migrant urban populations into policy processes potentially leads to more effective, sustainable and legitimate solutions.

show abstract

Towards Global Cooperation: The Case for a Deliberative Global Citizens' Assembly

Cited by 9 publications

References 30 publications

Earth stewardship: Shaping a sustainable future through interacting policy and norm shifts

Earth stewardship: Shaping a sustainable future through interacting policy and norm shifts

15 Calibrating the balance: The ethics of regulating the production and use of nanotechnology applications

Policy Opportunities and Constraints for Addressing Urban Precarity of Migrant Populations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About